Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

Republicans Rally Around Netanyahu After Schumer Called Israel Prime Minister An Obstacle To Peace; New Texas Law Gives State Police The Right To Arrest And Deport Illegal Immigrants; CNN Finds That Rapid Support Forces Militia Is Forcing Civilians Including Children To Join Their Group; Britain's "Daily Mirror" Reports That A Staff Member At A London Hospital Tried To Access The Medical Records of The Princess Of Wales; Iconic Hip- Hop Star Dr. Dre Cements His Legacy In His Beloved West Coast State Of California. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired March 20, 2024 - 12:00   ET




BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Hello everyone, live from Washington, I'm Bianna Golodryga.

ZAIN ASHER, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: And coming to you live from New York, I'm Zain Asher. You are indeed watching "One World".

GOLODRYGA: It is the latest sign of the widening rift between the Israeli Prime Minister and the U.S. President.

ASHER: Benjamin Netanyahu will address Republican senators soon via video link during a closed-door conference lunch, which really underscores the

hyper-politicization of Israeli policy in Washington right now.

GOLODRYGA: Republicans have rallied around Israel's Prime Minister after Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer last week called Prime Minister

Netanyahu an obstacle to peace. The highest-ranking elected Jewish official in government told the Senate that Netanyahu's government no longer fits

the needs of Israel and called for new elections.

ASHER: Mr. Netanyahu has also spurned a plea from President Joe Biden to call off a planned ground assault on Rafah, home to more than a million

displaced Palestinians. This as the U.S. Secretary of State returns to the Middle East on his sixth trip since the start of the Israeli-Hamas war.

Antony Blinken will visit Israel on Friday.

GOLODRYGA: Let's get more now from Sunlen Serfaty live on Capitol Hill. So, Sunlen, it's interesting that the Prime Minister will be speaking with

Republicans given that just over the weekend in an interview with Dana Bash, when she asked him his response to Senator Schumer's comments, he

called them inappropriate and that he shouldn't be interfering in another country's elections and that Israel is not a banana republic. So, what

about this now decision to kind of do exactly what he criticized and speak to Republican members of Congress?

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: That's absolutely a great point, Bianna, and definitely one that many people up here on Capitol Hill

have noted. The fact that the Prime Minister will appear in just a few -- a few minutes virtually on Capitol Hill, he'll be speaking to a room, a

closed door room of Republican senators only.

And it comes at this tense time. This is only notably one week since Senator Schumer made that massive floor speech that caused an uproar in

which he called for new elections. He criticized Prime Minister Netanyahu's handling of the threat of Hamas. And we saw an immediate and fierce

backlash from many Republicans up here on Capitol Hill, offended by the speech, angered by the speech.

Senator Barrasso, notably the person who invited the Prime Minister to speak today, he called that speech by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer,

deeply offensive to many Americans who are concerned what is happening in Israel. So again, he will be appearing virtually.

We will see if there'll be a Q and A. So, every tidbit coming from that meeting, of course, we'll be gathering up here on Capitol Hill. Certainly

it'll be interesting to see what he says, especially as you noted the backlash since last week and his comments over the weekend.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah, this isn't the first time the Prime Minister has created backlash and what some describe as division between Republicans and

Democrats over Israel, which for many years had been a bipartisan policy when it came to Congress and its decision making. And now it seems like

things are only getting more and more heated and divisive between the two. Sunlen Serfaty, thank you.

ASHER: All right. In the past 24 hours, the question of who polices the U.S. border with Mexico has been answered in different ways by different

courts, certainly throwing border security right now into turmoil.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah, it all centers on a new Texas law that would give state police the right to arrest and even deport illegal immigrants. That's

something that normally falls to federal border patrol agents. Right now, a federal appeals court is hearing arguments about the Texas law.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court briefly allowed the law to go into effect, though the appeals court put a new stay in place not long after

that. Critics say the law could lead to immigrants being harassed and racially profiled.


LINA HIDALGO, JUDGE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS: It's making people nervous. It makes me nervous. I think, you know, because the law is focused on whether

you are suspected of being an immigrant, it is just so extreme because it allows state police to say, you know, you look brown, you look Hispanic,

and therefore you can be arrested and possibly deported. So the possibility of that and the confusion, I think even legal experts are calling this

judicial whiplash.


ASHER: All right. Let's get straight down to Ed Lavandera, who is life arrest in El Paso, Texas.


So, Ed, just to sort of sum this up for our international audience. This law, SB4, essentially makes it a state crime to enter into Texas from

Mexico illegally and then gives states and local officials the authority to deport and arrest undocumented immigrants.

We know the Supreme Court initially sort of paved the way for this law to go through, and then appeals court blocked it. Just sum up to us, to our

international audience who may not be following the story, just sum up where things stand now at this point.

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, right now, this law, and it's a very controversial law, is on hold. And as we speak, the

state of Texas and the groups and the Biden administration Justice Department that have sued the state of Texas are arguing in court about

what will happen in the short term with this law -- if it will be allowed to go into effect while the legal case against it continues to play out in

the court.

So, you know, the legal whiplash has been really quite something here over the last few days. But as we stand here right now, the law is not in place.

But law enforcement agencies across the state are bracing for the possibility that it will be allowed to go into effect. And we've been

reaching out to these law enforcement agencies because this is really unprecedented.

The amount of authority, immigration authority, that this would give local law enforcement officers is a historic change. I mean, this is, as the

Biden administration and critics of this law have been arguing, you know, for a hundred years, they say, the immigration statutes in this country

have been enforced by federal law enforcement organizations like the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection.

And they say this is quite the departure and that if states were allowed to do this on their own, it would sow chaos and confusion all across the

country. That's why this is such a controversial and critical case that is being heard at this moment. But right now, Zain, law enforcement agencies

across the state say they are closely monitoring all of this.

But what we keep hearing and the theme that we have heard from very many departments across the state right now is that there doesn't seem, even if

this law is allowed to go into effect, there doesn't seem to be this appetite to send officers out scouring counties or cities looking for

people who might be here in Texas illegally without proper documentation.

They do say that if they come across migrants like this in the course of other criminal investigations and criminal scenarios, that they would apply

this law. But it doesn't seem like there's an appetite or a desire for many of these law enforcement agencies to send out officers looking for people

who don't have the proper documentation.

ASHER: All right, Ed Lavandera, live for us there. Thank you so much. Of course, this border debate comes as Democrats and Republicans in Congress

continue to fight over their efforts to boost border security. Joining us live now is Texas Republican Congresswoman Beth Van Duyne. Beth, thank you

so much for being with us, Congresswoman.

So, it is clear, I think you and I can both agree, that there is a crisis at the U.S. southern border. What is not clear is what exactly is the right

solution. There are a lot of people who look at this and say that this goes against over a century of immigration policy in this country.

That immigration border security is the purview of the federal government, of the Department of Homeland Security, not state and local officials, and

that this could potentially open the way to different states trying to enforce their own border security. Just walk us through your thoughts on

that, please.

BETH VAN DUYNE, U.S. HOUSE REPUBLICAN: Yeah, no, I agree. But I think we're in unprecedented times when you have seen the record number of people that

are crossing our border illegally. When the federal government fails to act, states shouldn't have to suffer. And Article Four, Section Four of the

Constitution clearly says that it's the responsibility, the duty, the obligation of the federal government to protect states from invasion.

But then Article One, Section 10 also provides states an ability that if that doesn't happen, that states can actually have the sovereignty to be

able to defend themselves from imminent danger and from invasion. So, I think what you're seeing right now happening in the courts is a fight

between those two provisions.

But the fact is, when I was working, when I was mayor and when I was sitting council in the city of Irving, we had a great partnership with

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, and we partnered together. And what we found was when laws were enforced, people of all nationalities, people

within all of our neighborhoods benefited.

GOLODRYGA: Congresswoman, I believe you were on with me a few weeks ago when the federal judge announced he was striking down that law just moments

before you and I spoke. Now, we have the Supreme Court weighing in, allowing it temporarily. Now it's back on hold with the appellate courts.

During this process, I'm just wondering, and I want to go back to what you and I discussed, because the Supreme Court ultimately goes back to Congress

and says that we are just here to weigh in on laws that Congress passes.


There was a bipartisan measure put in place, a bill that was struck from both Republicans and Democrats that had been described as one of the most

conservative bills that had been written yet to address this issue.

You have been very critical about this bill, along with some other Republicans, and I keep going back to why, because that would have been a

solution right there. At least a first step may not be perfect, but it would have been something to address an issue that I know you take very


VAN DUYNE: Yeah, again, I don't think that that would have been a solution. I think what that did was it normalized the unprecedented number of people

that we have crossing our border illegally. It did not -- it did not create asylum claims being taken up at the border. It invited more folks into our

country illegally without having the ability to be able to file them through, legally.

What we were doing is sending them up to 5000, in some cases 8500 a day, 5000 to 5500 average a week. But that would normalize the unprecedented

numbers that we have. That was not a solution. And by the way, that bill never even made it out of the Senate, so it was never even brought over to

the House.

But the House bill, H.R. Two, that we did send to the Senate, has the provisions in place that would have prevented a number of the deaths that

we've seen, the invasion that we've seen. And it would not have forced Texas to have to spend five billion dollars last year of its own dollars on

Operation Lone Star to be able to protect its citizens within its own state.

It's ridiculous that we're having to do that. It's basically as if the Biden administration is working with the Mexican cartels instead of working

to protect American citizens. And Texas should not have to suffer because the federal government fails to act.

ASHER: Congressman, I want to talk about just the sort of implications of this law, because back in the 1950s, as I'm sure you know, in this country,

there was a law that was sort of initiated or an operation that was initiated, Operation Wetback, obviously a pejorative term, that essentially

led to the rounding up of Mexicans who were suspected of being in this country illegally.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who are actually here legally, and actually some U.S. citizens ended up being deported, as well. Given that

history, given that everything is contextual, how concerned are you about the possibility here of racial profiling and also of the sort of brewing

mistrust that SB4 could lead to between migrant communities in Texas, which, by the way, is 40 percent Latino and also state and local officials?

VAN DUYNE: So, so very, very much so. The Texas law is in line and is consistent with federal law. It's not adding any additional measures other

than the state being allowed to be able to enforce it, because the federal government is not. But as far as people being, you know, untrustworthy of

it, the fact is, I was again, when I started at the local level in Irving, we had a great relationship with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.

We actually deported more illegal criminal immigrants from our city per capita than any other city in the country. And as a result, we became the

fifth safest city in the country. Crime, amazingly enough, when you actually enforce laws, decreases in all of your neighborhood's benefit. But

what we heard from the New York Times --

ASHER: But what safe plans would there be to ensure limited -- or to ensure that there isn't going to be racial profiling, because that is a

concern of a lot of people in Texas right now.

VAN DUYNE, Well, so what we heard and what we are threatened with from outside news agencies was that people were not going to want to move into

our city, that people, especially Latinos, were not going to feel safe in our city. And the fact is, is that when you think about who is most preyed

upon by criminal illegal aliens, it is other folks who are in our country illegally. Those are the people that it's most preyed upon.

So, when you actually enforce your laws, they benefit, as well. And instead of our city having decreases in population, instead of businesses moving

out of our city, what we found was we're one of the fastest growing cities in the country. People want to live in a safe environment. And they

recognize what's happening at our border right now is increasing crime and is creating disastrous results.

So, I think that's why you're seeing Biden's poll numbers drop. I think that's why you agree now that it is a crisis at the border. Finally, we

have been saying this for the last three years. There are measures that could be taken, an H.R. 2, which was sent over by a House led by

Republicans over to the Senate, could have that effect. But the Senate's not picking it up.

GOLODRYGA: Congressman, so let me ask you if, because this will likely go back to the Supreme Court, its involvement is not over yet at this point.

And let's say that they uphold this law in terms of the implementation, okay, that allows for local law enforcement there to arrest, to even detain

those who are crossing the border illegally from Mexico.

But then what? Because I know you've read that the Mexican President and Mexican authorities say that they will not accept them to be you know,

returned back and sent back to Mexico.


The majority aren't even from Mexico originally. So then what? Are you just going to have jails inundated with detainees?

VAN DUYNE: No, I think we've already seen how you have to negotiate with Mexico and you have to hit them on the economic conditions and economic

development. I think if Mexico is forced to actually feel an economic downturn as a result of them allowing that to continue, the invasion can

continue in our country, they will be more likely to act. We saw it under the Trump administration.

GOLODRYGA: But who is negotiating? But who is negotiating that? Is this now Texas unilaterally negotiating economic policy with Mexico?

VAN DUYNE: So, Abbott could actually have the ability, if he wanted to, to stop every single truck that's coming in from Mexico and have it searched.

He has the ability to do that now. Can you imagine if you had miles and miles of trucks that are trying to come in that directly would affect the

Mexican economy?

I guarantee you Obrador would open up and be willing to negotiate. It's sad that the Texas governor would have to do that. And we wouldn't expect that

from the State Department. But that's what we're seeing right now is what is being forced to happen, because the federal government has created the

policies that are allowing this mass invasion into our country.

ASHER: All right, Texas Congresswoman Beth Van Duyne, thank you so much for being with us.

VAN DUYNE: Thank you very much.

GOLODRYGA: Thank you.

ASHER: Of course. All right, some Israeli settlers have set their sights on a new prize, one that was actually unthinkable just a few months ago, the

reestablishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza.


DANIELLA WEISS, FORMER MAYOR OF KEDUMIM: The Arabs of Gaza lost the right to be in Gaza on the 7th of October. We are not doing to them. They are

doing to us.

ASHER: Why her views once seen, by the way, as quite extreme are actually becoming more popular.

GOLODRYGA: Also ahead, what was once a bustling hospital in Gaza now lies in ruins. A UNICEF spokesman gets emotional as he visits.


JAMES ELDER, UNICEF SPOKESPERSON: The last time I was in this hospital, there were thousands of people taking shelter there. I mean, look at this

place. Sorry, I need a minute.


ASHER: All right, digging deeper on our top story, of course, the Israel- Hamas war. The World Health Organization says that a growing number of infants in Gaza are on the brink of death because of acute hunger. The WHO

says that they're seeing the effects of starvation, newborn babies simply dying because their birth weight is far too low.


GOLODRYGA: This comes after a U.N.-backed report predicted an imminent famine in northern Gaza. Separately, a UNICEF spokesman returned to what

was once Gaza's second largest hospital. An emotional James Elder compares Nasser Hospital now to what it was just a few months ago. Take a look at

this video.


ELDER: The last time I was in this hospital, there were thousands of people taking shelter there. I mean, look at this place. Sorry, I need a minute.

Medical staff would do 36-hour shifts, these incredible people running, giving incredible care to every single child with the wounds of war who

needed it. Extraordinary medical staff.

To see so many children hurt, burnt, bandages around their tiny arms and legs, their families bent over them in anguish, in hope, as the doctors and

nurses, they whizzed around these corridors like superheroes doing everything they possibly could to save children. To now, to this -- this

solemn silence of death in these corridors.


ASHER: I want to give you a quick update now to a story that we first brought you yesterday. An Israeli non-profit group is asking the country's

Supreme Court to stop the removal of about two dozen Palestinians in East Jerusalem hospitals to Gaza.

GOLODRYGA: Physicians for Human Rights decided to take action following CNN's report. A spokesman says returning the Palestinians, some of them

babies, to Gaza during a conflict and humanitarian crisis is against international law and would pose a deliberate risk to innocent lives.

ASHER: Yeah, and the return, which is supposed to happen on Thursday rather, has actually already been delayed twice.

ASHER: All right, a vision of post-war Gaza by some Israelis would have been unthinkable before October 7th -- a Gaza without Palestinians. Any

such land grab would, of course, be illegal under international law, not to mention impractical and would spark global outrage. CNN's Chief

International Correspondent Clarissa Ward reports.


CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): High in the hills of the occupied West Bank, a flag flies in the face of a

Palestinian village. God is king, it says. Two young settlers guard this illegal outpost. Construction hasn't even begun. But we are not welcome.

WARD: So, they are asking us to leave. They don't want to talk to us. They said they've been here for about nine months.

WARD (voice-over): Dotted across the landscape, more signs of the fight to assert Israeli control over Palestinian land. The Arabic names on signposts

crudely erased. Under international law, the Beit Hogla settlement is illegal. But last February, the Israeli government officially recognized it

along with eight others, a move the U.S. strongly opposed.

"We're here because God promised us this land," as Rael Picar tells us. Now, these settlers have set their sights on a new prize, one that seemed

utterly impossible before October 7th.

"Returning to Gaza," they cheer. That is the goal of Zionist settler organization Nachala, one of more than a dozen groups now advocating for

the reestablishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza.

A recent promotional video even boasts that Gaza will become the next Riviera. Daniela Weiss is the godmother of the movement. She's already

started recruiting from the 700,000 strong settler community of Israel.

WARD: We're just arriving now at a settlement in the occupied West Bank. And we're heading to a talk that Daniella Weiss is giving to a group of

people who are potentially interested in resettling Gaza.

WARD (voice-over): We are for the land of Israel and Ben-Gavir, she says. About 20 people gather in the living room of a family home. Weiss knows

that for many in this community, there is deep nostalgia for Gush Katif, a block of 21 Israeli settlements that were forcibly evacuated by the IDF in

2005 when Israel left the Gaza Strip.

This is the vision of Gaza, she says. You see all the nucleus groups. A map has already been drawn up, with six groups laying claim to different parts

of the enclave.

WARD: So, they've just been handing out these little booklets that say, "People of Israel, return home." And then underneath, a call to return to

the settlements of Gaza.


WARD (voice-over): One of the organizers tells the group they have a representative flying to Florida to raise money. Nachala gets support from

a number of groups in the U.S., including AFSI, Americans for a Safe Israel, which co-sponsored a recent webinar on the return to Gush Katif,

even as the Biden administration has cracked down on settlements in the West Bank.

WEISS: There is very strong support from very prominent, from very, I would say, wealthy people, wealthy Jews.

WARD: In the U.S. In the U.S. Can you name any names?

WEISS: No, I cannot. No.

WARD (voice-over): Back at her home in Kedumim settlement, Weiss tells us she has already enrolled 500 families.

WEISS: I even have on my cell phone names of people who say, enlist me. Enroll me. I want to join. I want to join the groups that are going to

settle Gaza. I have to ask you, though, because we're sitting here talking and we're listening.

WEISS: Yeah, I'm listening. I hope you are listening.

WARD: Which is a reminder, I think, of the people who live here

WEISS: Yeah.

WARD: but also the people who live in Gaza. What happens to them --

WEISS: Okay.

WARD: -- in this vision of this new settlement with Jewish settlers, even in Gaza City?

WEISS: What I think about Gaza, the Arabs of Gaza lost the right to be in Gaza on the 7th of October. Yes, I do hear the mosque. I do hear the

prayer. Things were different until the 7th of October. No Arab -- I'm speaking about more than two million Arabs. They will not stay there. We,

Jews, will be in Gaza.

WARD: That sounds like ethnic cleansing.

WEISS: The Arabs want to annihilate the state of Israel. So, you can call them monsters. You can call them cleansing of Jews. We are not doing to

them. They are doing to us. I couldn't make it clearer when I said that myself, as a person who is preoccupied with settling the land, until the

7th of October, I didn't have plans of returning to Gaza. It's clear. I'm not interested in cleansing.

WARD: What is clear is that Weiss' views, traditionally seen as extreme in Israel, have become more popular since October 7th. In late January,

jubilant crowds packed an auditorium in Jerusalem for the Victory of Israel conference, calling for the resettlement of Gaza. A poll that month from

the Jewish People Policy Institute found that 26 percent of Israelis advocate the reconstruction of the Gush Katif settlements after the war is


Among supporters of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing coalition government, that number jumps to 51 percent. Several ministers

were present at the conference, including far-right heritage minister Amihai Eliyahu. In a rare interview with Western media, he tells us his

political decisions are guided by the Torah.

WARD: Is there anything about Gush Katif in here?


WARD: And that, settlements in Gaza are needed to prevent another October 7th.

ELIYAHU (through translator): The language of the land says that wherever there is a Jewish settlement, there will be more security. It doesn't mean

there will be absolute security, but there will be more security.

WARD: Why would you advocate for something that many would say is illegal, is immoral, is not supported by the majority of Israelis, and is also very

harmful to Israel in terms of its international standing?

ELIYAHU (through translator): Why do you think it's immoral to take land from someone who wants to kill me? Why is it immoral to take my land, which

my ancestors lived there, which I've even given up, to someone who slaughters, rapes, and murders me? What is more immoral than that?

WARD (voice-over): Netanyahu has called resettling Gaza, quote, an unrealistic goal, and most Israelis agree. But that hasn't stopped scores

of IDF soldiers fighting there from posting videos, calling for a return to Gush Katif. For many supporters of the settler movement, what was once a

distant fantasy is now a fervent dream. Clarissa Ward, CNN, the Occupied West Bank.


GOLODRYGA: Coming up for us, the U.S. economy is strong. Inflation is way down from its highs, the stock market is hot, and home prices are rising.

ASHER: So, then why are so many Americans feeling pessimistic? We'll take a look.

ASHER: Also ahead, yet another development involving the Princess of Wales.


Details surrounding a potential privacy breach in terms of her medical records in the U.K. We'll explain after the break.


ASHER: All right. Welcome back to "One World". I'm Zain Asher.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. "Wall Street" today opened mixed ahead of the U.S. Federal Reserve's decision on interest rates due out in about

90 minutes from now.

ASHER: Yeah, investors on "Wall Street" are expecting rates to stay unchanged amid a slight uptick in inflation, but they'll be looking for

clues from the central bank about how soon rates will come down.

GOLODRYGA: Joining us in New York is CNN's Matt Egan. Matt, I know you spoke with the Goldman Sachs chief Economist, Jan Hatzius. In terms of rate

cuts, there had been some predictions late last year that maybe we would see one or two by this summer. Now, it looks like that's not happening

anytime soon. So, what exactly in the language are investors and analysts looking for?

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Well, Bianna and Zain, it seems pretty clear that Jerome Powell is just not ready to give borrowers a break just yet. And it

is a very expensive time to borrow, right? Mortgages, credit cards, car loans. Remember, two years ago, the Fed started really spiking interest

rates at almost an unprecedented pace, trying to get inflation under control. And really, since last May, the Fed has been in a holding pattern,

keeping interest rates at these 23-year highs. You can see rates have just been flat. And Fed officials, they've made clear that they need more

confidence that inflation is back under control before they start lowering rates.


So, no real chance of an interest rate cut today, priced into the market basically at zero percent. Even at the next meeting, May one, a very low

chance. And really, people might have to be waiting until June or July or maybe even later. The Fed statement itself is unlikely to really have a

dramatic change.

I think the real drama today is going to be in what Jerome Powell says, if he drops any hints during the press conference, and perhaps more

importantly, those new projections that are due out from the Fed. The big question here is whether or not Fed officials are still pricing in three

interest rate cuts this year or if they've dialed back those expectations.

ASHER: Yeah, investors will be passing through the language, as they always do, very, very carefully in just a couple of hours from now. But just in

terms of you speaking to this top economist at Goldman Sachs, I mean, how bullish are they right now on the economy? Because there aren't as many

sort of recessionary fears as what we had just a couple of years ago.

EGAN: That's right. A few years ago, a lot of economists, they basically thought a recession was inevitable. Goldman Sachs, a top economist, Jan

Hatzius, he was really early to be in the soft landing camp. And he told me that he is standing by that call. Take a listen to what he said.


JAN HATZIUS, CHIEF ECONOMIST, GOLDMAN SACHS: If I look at the news flow overall over the last year, it's still very, very positive. Inflation has

come down very substantially over that period. And more importantly, it's come down without significant weakness and activity. We haven't seen a

recession. We haven't been close to a recession. The labor market is still quite strong. Employment has continued to increase at a rapid clip.


EGAN: Not even close to a recession. Despite all that pressure from the Fed, this, of course, will be a big relief to officials in the White House

because the last five sitting presidents who had a recession during the year that they were under re-election, they all lost that re-election, most

recently Donald Trump. But Bianna and Zain, the longer the Fed keeps interest rates at these high levels, the greater the risk that eventually

they start to do some real damage to the economy.

ASHER: All right, Matt Egan, live for us there. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

GOLODRYGA: So, ask Americans how they feel about the state of their economy, and it often comes down to one word, inflation. But rising prices

for everyday goods and services isn't just a U.S. problem. A worldwide surge in inflation began, as I'm sure we all can remember, back in the

middle of 2021. It hit record levels one year later, driven, of course, by global factors. Since then, it has slowed sharply.

But for many American families, the high cost of necessities is a lingering source of pain and worry as they remain somewhat pessimistic about their

own financial situation. A new CNN poll shows that only 35 percent of Americans say things in the country are actually going well, although

that's up seven percent since last fall.

And to be sure, the U.S. economy has shown solid growth since 2020. The stock market is booming. Just yesterday, the S and P 500 hit a record high.

Unemployment is low. Wages are up. And that recession that was predicted, as we just talked about, for so long, well, it never materialized.

Well, time now for The Exchange and a look at the disconnect between public perception and the economic reality in the U.S. CNN Global Economic Analyst

Rana Foroohar joins us now live from New York. So, Rana, on the one hand, we listed all of the positive signs in the U.S. economy.

Yes, inflation was a global problem. And for sure, the U.S. has recovered far better than the rest of the world. Unemployment is near a record low.

This is a President that has signed into law historic legislation addressing the economy.

He's been touting it and yet his approval rating on his handling of the economy is in the mid 30s. I'm wondering, from your perspective, how do you

account for that? And what, if anything, can this administration do at this point before November?

RANA FOROOHAR, CNN GLOBAL ANALYST: Well, look, there's several reasons for that disconnect. You named the biggest part of this, which is inflation.

But inflation has been coming down. So, why does the disconnect still seem so looming? And I would say that the biggest reason is when you get a

really short, sharp shock, like we've seen the last couple of years, where inflation, even though it's coming down now, it went up 20 percent in the

things that matter.

Food, fuel, you know -- housing has been higher than that in some places -- insurance. The things that you actually have to pay for. And so, people

feel that psychically like a body blow. And history tells us that when that kind of event happens, you know, you can go back to the Great Depression

and see people like my grandma that would use a teabag 10 times because they grew up in that period. It changes your behavior for a long, long



And that happens on the upside, too. You can look at, say, the baby boomers, how they're still spending many of them into retirement because

they grew up in a really strong economy in which nothing bad could happen.

I think you have people just looking around and saying, wow, what just happened? I just want to stay still. I don't want to make any quick moves.

That's a big part of this. There are other parts of it, too, though. You know, the fact that there's so much cognitive political bias out there in

the world right now.

You know, a lot of the Biden stimulus money has gone into red states. They've gone -- it's gone into poor areas. But if those folks are already

voting Republican in those areas, they're going to be less likely than they would in the past to say, well, wait a minute, maybe I got something good

from this administration because their biases are more entrenched than they have been in the past.

ASHER: And just in terms of I mean, obviously, you talked about inflation shock, right? And that is a big deal. Just the fact that prices went up so

fast, so quickly that it's going to take people time to recover. But just in terms of the sort of lag time between stimulus and also feeling the

effects of stimulus.

ASHER: You know, obviously, President Biden invested or pumped over a trillion dollars, one point nine trillion dollars into the economy right

out of the gate. And then there were additional rounds of money that he pumped into the economy right up until the midterms. But it does take some

time, right, between pumping that kind of money into the economy and then people feeling the effects of that.

FOROOHAR: Well, for sure, Zain. And, you know, it's important to step back and say, what is this administration trying to do? It's really trying to

orchestrate a mid to long term change in how the entire American economy functions. They're not doing a quick money dump. This isn't sort of, you

know, post-COVID, you know, give folks a check.

This is -- we're going to build bridges again. We're going to build factories again. We're going to build semi-conductors. Those are years, if

not decades-long projects. I think they're laudable. I think that they're they're appropriate for where we are in the economy, but they're not quick

fixes. And so, it's going to take people years in some -- in some communities to feel the jobs effects.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah, and I think you're right to tout the partisan issue, as well, because it is super hyper at this point. And you hear the

administration frustrated and the President calling out elected officials in Republican states who initially opposed legislation, but are now sort of

taking credit for it as they're seeing it have a positive impact in their economies. And we'll see if his polling number is improved between now and

November. Rana Foroohar, thank you so much.

ASHER: Thank you.

FOROOHAR: Thank you.

ASHER: All right, coming up, thousands in Sudan are at risk of starvation. CNN gets an exclusive look inside the ongoing civil war and the harsh

ultimatum many children face.



GOLODRYGA: The deadly civil war in Sudan shows no signs of ending. After nine months, more than 13,000 people have been killed and more than seven

million have left their homes.

ASHER: Yeah, an exclusive report. CNN found that the rapid support forces militia is forcing civilians, including children, by the way, into a deal

with the devil. Enlist or starve. Those are the options they're giving them. CNN's Chief International Investigative Correspondent, Nima Elbagir,

has this story.


NIMA ELBAGIR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): Propaganda video from the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, the RSF. For much of the last year, they have slashed and burned their way

through the country. This video shows them triumphant and entrenched in the very heart of Sudan -- Al-Jazeera state.

And they are recruiting local men in the hundreds. But it's impossible to tell who here is a willing soldier and who has been forcibly conscripted.

Eyewitnesses have told CNN that RSF soldiers are giving civilians an ultimatum. Enlist or starve. Our investigation shows how almost 700 men and

65 children have been forcibly recruited to swell RSF ranks. And that's just what we've been able to verify in Al-Jazeera.

Across Sudan, reports and images like this one are emerging. Children in RSF uniform. As across Sudan, millions forced from their homes by violence

now face famine. CNN spoke to three dozen eyewitnesses, survivors and the families of victims. The RSF, they say, is weaponizing hunger, denying food

to those who won't join.

Aid groups say almost four million children in Sudan are already malnourished as the country faces mass starvation.

If aid agencies can't get food to those in need, almost a quarter of a million children could die. Jazeera is Sudan's breadbasket. It's heartland.

To control this part of Sudan is to exert control over who lives and who dies. The RSF deny they are responsible for the hunger gripping the

country. Yet they control every aspect of farming this land.

They control the warehouses of food and aid meant to support the most vulnerable. They control the seed supplies, fertilizer, pesticides,

agricultural machinery and irrigation channels. And it's not just the infrastructure. Farmers are being targeted, brutalized, degraded and even

killed. Not just to control food, but to force allegiance.

You hear shots off camera as six of the men are executed, according to survivors who spoke to CNN. Those who were spared say the RSF threatened to

starve their families if they didn't join. The RSF sit in the heart of Sudan, hoarding food for men for millions. From here, they can wait out,

starve out Sudan's people and its army. Fear, uncertainty, despair cascade as the months of war drag on and the world looks away. Nima Elbagir, CNN,



GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Nima for that really powerful report. We should note the RSF did not respond to our request for comment. CNN shared these

findings with the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, who said the evidence we uncovered of forced enlistment is tantamount to

contemporary slavery. We'll be right back.



ASHER: All right, we are closely following a potential data breach involving the Princess of Wales. Britain's Daily Mirror reports that a

staff member at a London hospital that was treating the princess allegedly tried to access her private medical records during her stay in January.

GOLODRYGA: The royals just can't catch a break here. The U.K.'s data watchdog says that it is assessing the report. An executive at the hospital

says disciplinary steps will be taken if these allegations are true.

ASHER: All right, CNN's Anna Stewart joins us live now from London. Anna, this is out of control, right? Trying to breach and sort of hack into or

break into her medical records, that represents a breach of privacy to the utmost degree. Just walk us through what we know happened, because

obviously this is very damaging to the hospital involved, as well.

ANNA STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. And if true, this really is, well, a major line I would say has been crossed in addition to sort of

weeks and weeks of intrigue around the Princess of Wales' whereabouts, her condition and so on. And I think this is taking things really down a very

dangerous step or process, I would say.

This is "Daily Mirror's" tabloid newspaper. They came out with this report this morning, and it alleges that at least one worker tried to view the

medical records of the Princess of Wales. As you say, she stayed in the London Clinic Hospital back in January for abdominal surgery, which you

knew about. We knew that she stayed there for about 13 nights.

Now, this is a hospital that treats a number of high-profile patients, including royals in the past, the Prince Philip and also the Princess

Margaret, as well. And I think this will be very damaging for the reputation of the hospital if found true. Now, the ICO, which is the U.K.'s

data watchdog, are investigating. They've received a breach report.

They say, if true, this could be a criminal offense to access patient data in this way without permission. The hospital in question is, of course,

very concerned about all these reports. So, they're looking into it, too. And actually, we had a statement from the CEO of the hospital saying,

"There is no place at our hospital for those who intentionally breached the trust of any of our patients or colleagues."

And so, one would imagine that all sorts will happen if they discover who this individual was, if the breach did happen. But clearly, the intrigue

around the Princess of Wales and the royals more generally has been, well, rife for the last few weeks. And it's taken quite an unpleasant turn at

this stage.

ASHER: Yeah, it's gone down a really sort of dark rabbit hole. Anna Stewart, we have to leave it there. Thank you so much.

GOLODRYGA: Well, to more uplifting news, iconic hip-hop star Dr. Dre has cemented his legacy in his beloved West Coast state of California.


ASHER: Bianna, I know you're a Tupac fan.


GOLODRYGA: I'm a huge Tupac fan.

ASHER: What about Dre? You like Dre, as well?


ASHER: I keep learning all these things about you.

GOLODRYGA: We'll talk more about Dre after the show. But yes, also a fan.

ASHER: The rapper now has, as you can see in the video, his very own star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Something that he said was actually a long-

time coming, long-time collaborator and friend. Snoop Dogg praised Dr. Dre for mentoring him over the years.

GOLODRYGA: Well, as for his Hollywood star, the nine-time Grammy winner says growing up in Compton, California, he could never have imagined such

an honor. Look at him. I feel so old, too, at this point.

ASHER: It is a long time. I mean, Dr. Dre has been around for I mean, that's like my childhood, really.


ASHER: It's hard to imagine that only now, in 2024, he's getting his due with this Hollywood Walk of Fame.

GOLODRYGA: Last week, it was Lenny Kravitz. Now, it's Dr. Dre.


GOLODRYGA: I am really a fan of ending the show with these Hall of Fame segments. That's all I have to say. And that does it for this hour of "One

World". I'm Bianna Golodryga.

ASHER: And I'm Zain Asher. Thank you so much for watching. Amanpour is up next.